BY KEVIN R. BROCK, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR
\nTHE HILL<\/p>\n
John Durham<\/a><\/span>\u00a0has been a special prosecutor for almost a year and a half \u2014 not a long time, but plenty of time for a drumbeat to begin that he was showing little progress against his orders to examine the origins of the debunked Trump-Russia collusion narrative that convulsed a presidency. His few indictments so far have been directed against\u00a0peripheral<\/a>\u00a0players<\/a>, feeding a fear among\u00a0Donald Trump<\/a><\/span>\u2019s supporters that elites higher up the stack are going to get away with their chicanery.<\/p>\n The problem for Durham is that these perceptions were providing the Biden Department of Justice (DOJ) with increasing political top cover to shut down the special prosecutor\u2019s office as an unproductive, politics-driven exercise in futility that is wasting taxpayer dollars. If Durham were to be terminated, the American people might not even push back much since no one had a clue whether his investigation was bearing meaningful fruit.<\/p>\n Attorney General\u00a0Merrick Garland<\/a><\/span>\u00a0already had undercut Durham\u2019s investigation once by\u00a0taking steps<\/a>\u00a0to rehabilitate the reputation of fired FBI Deputy Director\u00a0Andrew McCabe<\/a><\/span>, a key figure in the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion debacle. The Biden DOJ is not friendly to the goals of Mr. Durham.<\/p>\n Durham couldn\u2019t hold a news conference or pen an op-ed touting progress; that\u2019s just not done by investigators in the middle of an investigation. So, he turned to a readily available vehicle \u2014 a routine, fairly innocuous\u00a0motion filed with the court<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 to embed an explosive message to the DOJ and the American people. It landed like fireworks at a funeral. No one saw it coming.<\/p>\n Tucked inside the court filing, John Durham laid out a good chunk of the case he\u2019s building, and it was stunning. Durham revealed the outlines of a corrupt conspiracy by operatives linked to\u00a0Hillary Clinton<\/a><\/span>\u2019s presidential campaign. The exposed conspiracy allegedly made a contrived, fraudulent and shocking attempt to entice the FBI and CIA to use their powers against the rival Trump campaign and presidency.<\/p>\n This recent filing by Durham was designed to have two effects. First, and most important, he has now made any decision by the president or attorney general to dump him much more difficult to undertake. The last time a president\u00a0fired a special prosecutor<\/a>\u00a0who was making significant progress, he lost his presidency.<\/p>\n Second, Durham has signaled to the American people that his investigation has legs, despite perceptions of plodding inertia. He has provided hope that accountability in D.C. \u2014 rare as a MAGA sticker on a Prius \u2014 actually might happen.<\/p>\n Durham\u2019s filing triggered hyperbolic conjecture on the right and nervous silence on the left.\u00a0 Don\u2019t be distracted by reactions driven by politics. Look at the actual words Durham used; they\u2019re troubling enough on their own.<\/p>\n Those words are found in a section of the filed motion titled \u201cFactual Background<\/a>.\u201d In it, Durham expands on information that led him to indict an attorney connected to the Hillary Clinton campaign, Michael Sussmann, for allegedly lying to the FBI.<\/p>\n According to Durham, Sussmann brought information to the FBI in September 2016 that he claimed proved a direct connection between candidate Trump and Russia to get the FBI to investigate. But Durham says Sussmann falsely told the FBI that he was not presenting the information on behalf of any client when, in fact, he was billing the Clinton campaign for his time.<\/p>\n Sussmann\u2019s defense attorneys\u00a0now argue<\/a>, in effect, that even if he lied, the lie\u00a0would not be material because the information was valid. But the lie\u00a0would be quite material, because Sussmann allegedly was asking the FBI to expend costly resources to investigate his claims.\u00a0If he concealed the clients on whose behalf he evidently was acting, as Durham charges, he\u00a0would have fraudulently deprived the FBI of facts that would have helped the bureau decide whether it was worth investing taxpayer dollars on an investigation. Knowing Sussmann\u2019s true affiliations was clearly information the FBI deserved to know.<\/p>\n In addition, despite the Sussmann attorneys\u2019 assertions that the information he possessed was bona fide, Durham makes an interesting case why it allegedly wasn\u2019t. At this point in the Factual Background section, he expands on the role allegedly played by \u201cTech Executive 1,\u201d now known to be\u00a0Rodney Joffe of Neustar<\/a>, one of the country\u2019s most powerful tech companies you\u2019ve probably never heard of.<\/p>\n Durham\u2019s description of Joffe\u2019s alleged activities does not paint him in a good light. According to Durham, Joffe exploited Neustar data and other friendly sources to help him \u201cestablish … an inference and narrative\u201d tying Trump to Russia \u2014 and that he allegedly did so to please \u201cVIPs\u201d within the Clinton campaign and its law firm. Sussmann happened to be Joffe\u2019s attorney as well.<\/p>\n Joffe, in this scenario, isn\u2019t an independent whistleblower; he\u2019s a partisan whistle maker.\u00a0 Durham could only know all this if either Joffe told him or the sources Joffe approached for help disclosed those conversations to Durham\u2019s investigators. Neither reality can be comforting to those involved. Of all the points made in the Factual Background, Joffe\u2019s alleged efforts and their disclosure are the most damaging to those who may have participated in a burgeoning conspiracy.<\/p>\n It is particularly damaging because, if true, Joffe appears to have unethically and possibly illegally turned over proprietary government data to a civilian third party. Plus, Durham makes a\u00a0compelling argument<\/a>\u00a0that the data Joffe allegedly gave Sussmann for delivery to the FBI is incomplete and made to look more sinister than it really is. In addition, Sussmann and Joffe allegedly withheld from the FBI important context that would have placed the sinister overtones in a more innocuous light.<\/p>\n Thanks to a routine court filing, the nation now knows the Durham investigation is no joke. He has set a ladder against a formidable wall and is climbing it rung by rung, apparently gaining cooperators and locking in testimony before a federal grand jury. There will be more squirming to come in powerful circles, but John Durham must be allowed to continue his important work.<\/p>\n Kevin R. Brock, former assistant director of intelligence for the FBI, was an FBI special agent for 24 years and principal deputy director of the\u00a0National Counterterrorism Center<\/a>\u00a0(NCTC). He independently consults with private companies and public-safety agencies on strategic mission technologies.<\/em><\/p>\n